Hi Waldemar I've not compared appengine-patch and google-app-engine-django for performance but when using google-app-engine-django r86 (which used django 1.0 via zipimport) I was getting a high-cpu warning for every second or third page load and for each of these pages the logs showed that zipimport wa re-loading django. When I moved across to google-app- engine-django r90, which uses the built in django 1.0 libraries this issue went away and my cpu usage and page load times dropped significantly.
I think perhaps the important factor here is the very low concurrency for this specific application. As I said, it was written for a very small company which means that most of the time no-one at all using it and at most there are only ever one or two people. This leads to an extended time between hits on the application which causes the django zip to be re-imported at best every 2-3 page loads (my guess is that the entire app is being flushed from memory). If I hit pages on the application in quick succession this doesn't happen, which may explain the figures you obtained for zipimport performance. If the application was being more heavily used then I'm sure that the zipimport overhead would not be an issue at all. I'm a little worried that this has turned into an appengine-patch vs google-app-engine-django argument, which it really isn't meant to be at all. I think appengine-patch is a fantastic bit of software and I fully intend to use it in the future but this specific application is written using google-app-engine-django. Zipimport issues aside I'd rather not spend the time porting it back to appengine patch but I want to be able to continue supporting it moving forwards which is the sole reason I asked on this mailing list about the status of the google-app-engine-django project. Thanks Andy On Aug 14, 3:04 pm, Waldemar Kornewald <wkornew...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Andy, > > On Aug 14, 2:50 pm, Andy <a...@robotlovesyou.com> wrote: > > > Also, the project I am working on has a very low usage pattern. It is > > written for my friend's electrical contracting company and there's > > only 3 of them! This results in zipimport being used a lot and > > negatively affecting application response times. > > I tested zipimport performance and Django starts almost 2x faster with > zipimport, so you're actually losing performance. > > I'd still be interested in startup performance of google-app-engine- > django vs app-engine-patch. Did you actually measure the difference > between sites that are configured exactly the same (i.e., disable app- > engine-patch modules that are not needed, etc.)? > > Bye, > Waldemar Kornewald --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google App Engine" group. To post to this group, send email to google-appengine@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to google-appengine+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
